Usually calm water district election has people riled up

LODI - It's been a quarter-century, maybe longer, since an obscure water district in north San Joaquin County had a contested election.

Alex Breitler

LODI - It's been a quarter-century, maybe longer, since an obscure water district in north San Joaquin County had a contested election.

But ask people to open their pocketbooks for something they've always gotten for free, and you can expect a little uprising.

Two seats will be up for grabs in the November election, largely because of one man - a third-grade science teacher and rancher - and his bitter battle against a new fee charging landowners to pump groundwater.

The fee, approved by the North San Joaquin Water Conservation District board in May 2007, has spawned courtroom showdowns and shouting matches in the middle of public meetings.

The teacher, Bryan Pilkington, calls the district's "groundwater assessment fee" a "tax" and says it should have been subject to a full vote of the people. He attends each district meeting, videotapes them, blurts out questions and has been known to get a few board members worked up.

"Yeah, I'm passionate," Pilkington said. "I'm passionate because this district doesn't ask the people, 'What would you like us to do for you?' "

Now, he wants a seat on the same board that he has, at times, lambasted.

"I think we'll work together just fine as long as we stay focused that what we're doing is working for the people," Pilkington said.

His opponent is Stanley Chaves, a 42-year-old dairy farmer who supports paying a fee "if that's what it takes" to get surface water from the Mokelumne River to the 5,501 landowners in the district.

That's the point of the fee. The district has had the right to take water from the Mokelumne for decades, but has been unable to do so because it lacks money to build pipes and canals, and a fish screen.

The state has threatened to take away the district's water right if it doesn't start using it. On top of that, underground water levels have dropped because too much water has been pumped from the aquifer, officials say.

Some fear that if the district doesn't take river water soon, regulators will step in and dictate how much groundwater each landowner can pump.

Chaves says that could mean 25 percent of his 200 acres taken out of production.

"I need every chunk of ground we can get," he said. "If the state takes over, ... it's going to hurt worse."

In a second race on the ballot, rancher Dale Carver - a groundwater fee opponent, like Pilkington - challenges current board member John Ferreira.

Carver said he is against taxes on water and said it's important that river water be kept in the district. Opponents to the fee allege that the district intends to sell river water to Stockton; North San Joaquin says it will not do that unless there is more water than the district needs.

Ferreira has criticized Pilkington for litigation that one official says has cost the district $150,000 in lawyers' fees - money that could have been spent building pipelines. An initiative to repeal the groundwater charge, spearheaded by Pilkington, will cost another $100,000, the district says.

"These people don't want to see the reality in front of them," Ferreira said. "All the other districts have groundwater charges, except ours."